Changes in the Gasometric and Hemodynamic Profile upon Graft Reperfusion in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Patients

Main Article Content

Alfonso de Jesus Flores Rodriguez
Enrique Monares Zepeda
Karla Joselyne Manrique Marines
Mariana Elisa Guillen Camacho
Javier Vazquez Falconi Justiniani
Ricardo Daniel Romero Morelos
Paulina Carpinteyro Espin

Abstract

Introduction: In the field of medicine, the study of hemodynamics is fundamental to understanding the functioning of the cardiovascular system and its impact on tissue oxygenation. Within this context, crucial parameters such as mean systemic filling pressure (MSFP), cardiac output (CO) and oxygen extraction rate (EO2) play essential roles in regulating tissue perfusion and oxygen delivery to the lungs the vital organs. In the case of kidney transplant recipient patients, the interaction between these parameters acquires unique relevance, given the intimate relationship between cardiovascular function and the new implanted kidney.


 Material And Methods: Material And Methods: A descriptive, observational, single-center, and retrospective study was carried out undergoing living donor kidney transplant patients between June 2022-2023 at the Hospital Juarez de Mexico.


 Results: 54 patient records were examined, 24 with exclusion criteria. Remaining 30, 18 were female (60%) and 12 were male (40%); Receiver: Age 30.46±11.68 years; Weight: 59.93±11.87kg; Size: 156.20±18.74cm; Hemoglobin: 9.87±1.62g/dl. Prior hemodynamic values to reperfusion: CaO2 (arterial content) 13.44 ± 2.22, CvO2 (venous content) 9.07 ± 2.20, Da-vO2 (arterio-venous difference) 3.67 ± 1.48, CO (cardiac output) 5.65 ± 3.13, VS ( stroke volume) 76.05±41.73, SVR(systemic vascular resistance) 852.61±396.72, DO2(oxygen delivery) 770.89±444.07, VO2(oxygen consumption) 239.33±29.38, EO2(oxygen extraction) 26.83±9.82, PMSF (mean systemic filling pressure) 17.47±3.09 mm Hg with Student's T con values of p<0.05 statistically significant; Hemodynamic values after reperfusion: CaO2 13.3±2.18, CvO2 8.11±1.61, Da-vO2 5.03±1.04, CO 4.57±1.26, VS 62.32±17.41, SVR 1265.97±419.41, DO2 621.66±150.83, VO2 239.33±29.38, EO2 37.62 ±5.28, PMSF 14.27±2.44 mm Hg with Student's T statistically significant values of p<0.05.


Conclusions: Undergoing kidney transplantation patients strategies that include the optimization of PMSF, CO and EO2 based on their determinants can be implemented to improve perfusion and oxygenation of kidney transplanted prior kidney graft reperfusion, which in turn contributes to longterm viability and improved quality of life for the transplant recipient.

Article Details

How to Cite
Rodriguez, A. de J. F., Monares Zepeda, E., Manrique Marines, K. J., Guillen Camacho, M. E., Vazquez Falconi Justiniani, J., Romero Morelos, R. D., & Carpinteyro Espin, P. (2024). Changes in the Gasometric and Hemodynamic Profile upon Graft Reperfusion in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Patients. International Journal of Medical Science and Clinical Research Studies, 4(02), 316–322. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmscrs/v4-i02-29
Section
Articles

References

I. Wagener, G.; Bezinover, D.; Wang, C.; Kroepfl, E.; Diaz, G.; Giordano, C.; West, J.; Kindscher, J.D.; Moguilevitch, M.; Nicolau-Raducu, R.; et al. Fluid Management During Kidney Transplantation: A Consensus Statement of the Committee on Transplant Anesthesia of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Transplantation 2021, 105, 1677–1684.

II. Halawa, A.; Rowe, S.; Roberts, F.; Nathan, C.; Hassan, A.; Kumar, A.; Suvakov, B.; Edwards, B.; Gray, C. A Better Journey for Patients, a Better Deal for the NHS: The Successful Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Program after Renal Transplant Surgery. Exp. Clin. Transplant. 2018, 16, 127–132

III. Prionas, A.; Craddock, C.; Papalois, V. Feasibility, Safety and Efficacy of Enhanced Recovery After Living Donor Nephrectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 10, 21

IV. Espino, K.A.; Narvaez, J.R.F.; Ott, M.C.; Kayler, L.K. Benefits of multimodal enhanced recovery pathway in patients undergoing kidney transplantation. Clin. Transplant. 2018, 32, e13173.

V. Sarnak, M.J.; Amann, K.; Bangalore, S.; Cavalcante, J.L.; Charytan, D.M.; Craig, J.C.; Gill, J.S.; Hlatky, M.A.; Jardine, A.G.; Landmesser, U.; et al. Chronic Kidney Disease and Coronary Artery Disease: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2019, 74, 1823–1838.

VI. Chadban, S.J.; Ahn, C.; Axelrod, D.A.; Foster, B.J.; Kasiske, B.L.; Kher, V.; Kumar, D.; Oberbauer, R.; Pascual, J.; Pilmore, H.L.; et al. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation. Transplantation 2020, 104, S1–S103.

VII. Jha, A.K.; Lata, S. Kidney transplantation in valvular heart disease and pulmonary hypertension: Consensus in waiting. Clin. Transplant. 2021, 35, e14116.

VIII. El-Boghdadly, K.; Cook, T.M.; Goodacre, T.; Kua, J.; Denmark, S.; McNally, S.; Mercer, N.; Moonesinghe, S.R.; Summerton, D.J. Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: An update: A multidisciplinary consensus statement on behalf of the Association of Anesthetists, Centre for Perioperative Care, Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations, Royal College of Anesthetists, Royal College of Surgeons of England. Anesthesia 2022, 77, 580–587.

IX. Ljungqvist, O.; de Boer, H.D.; Balfour, A.; Fawcett, W.J.; Lobo, D.N.; Nelson, G.; Scott, M.J.; Wainwright, T.W.; Demartines, N. Opportunities and Challenges for the Next Phase of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: A Review. JAMA Surg. 2021, 156, 775–784.

X. Smudla, A.; Trimmel, D.; Szabo, G.; Fazakas, J. Systolic Blood Pressure Pattern: The Tick Mark Signal of Delayed Renal Graft Function. Transplant. Proc. 2019, 51, 1226–1230.

Most read articles by the same author(s)